Department of Kinesiology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269-1110, USA.
J Athl Train. 2010 Mar-Apr;45(2):170-80. doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-45.2.170.
Previous research has indicated that despite awareness of the current literature on the recommended prevention and care of exertional heat stroke (EHS), certified athletic trainers (ATs) acknowledge failure to follow those recommendations.
To investigate the current knowledge, attitudes, and practices of ATs regarding the recognition and treatment of EHS.
Cross-sectional study.
Online survey.
We obtained a random sample of e-mail addresses for 1000 high school and collegiate ATs and contacted these individuals with invitations to participate. A total of 498 usable responses were received, for a 25% response rate.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The survey instrument evaluated ATs' knowledge and actual practice regarding EHS and included 29 closed-ended Likert scale questions (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree), 2 closed-ended questions rated on a Likert scale (1 = lowest value, 9 = greatest value), 8 open-ended questions, and 7 demographic questions. We focused on the open-ended and demographic questions.
Although most ATs (77.1%) have read the current National Athletic Trainers' Association position statement on heat illness, only 18.6% used rectal thermometers to assess core body temperature to recognize EHS, and 49.7% used cold-water immersion to treat EHS. Athletic trainers perceived rectal thermometers as the most valid temperature assessment device when compared with other assessment devices (P <or= .05), but they used oral thermometers as the primary assessment tool (49.1%). They identified cold-water immersion as the best cooling method (P <or= .05), even though they used other means to cool a majority of the time (50.3%).
The ATs surveyed have sound knowledge of the correct means of EHS recognition and treatment. However, a significant portion of these ATs reported using temperature assessment devices that are invalid with athletes exercising in the heat. Furthermore, they reported using cooling treatment methods that have inferior cooling rates.
先前的研究表明,尽管认证的运动训练师(ATs)了解有关运动性热射病(EHS)预防和护理的现行文献,但他们承认并未遵循这些建议。
调查 ATs 对 EHS 的识别和治疗的现有知识、态度和实践。
横断面研究。
在线调查。
我们从 1000 名高中和大学 ATs 的电子邮件地址中随机抽取样本,并向这些个体发送邀请以参与调查。共收到 498 份可用回复,回复率为 25%。
该调查工具评估了 ATs 对 EHS 的知识和实际实践,包括 29 个封闭式李克特量表问题(1 = 强烈不同意,7 = 强烈同意)、2 个按李克特量表评分的封闭式问题(1 = 最低值,9 = 最高值)、8 个开放式问题和 7 个人口统计学问题。我们专注于开放式和人口统计学问题。
尽管大多数 ATs(77.1%)已经阅读了当前的国家运动训练师协会关于热病的立场声明,但只有 18.6%使用直肠温度计来评估核心体温以识别 EHS,而 49.7%使用冷水浸泡来治疗 EHS。与其他评估设备相比,ATs 认为直肠温度计是最有效的体温评估设备(P≤.05),但他们主要使用口腔温度计作为评估工具(49.1%)。他们认为冷水浸泡是最好的冷却方法(P≤.05),尽管他们在大多数时候使用其他方法进行冷却(50.3%)。
接受调查的 ATs 对 EHS 识别和治疗的正确方法有很好的了解。然而,相当一部分 ATs 报告说使用了在运动员在热环境中运动时无效的体温评估设备。此外,他们报告说使用了冷却效果较差的冷却治疗方法。